Cold Fusion – NASA – LENR Future

Cold Fusion – NASA – LENR Future

The Chief Scientist of NASA and the Chief Scientist NASA Langley Porter Research Institute move forward with the energetics of LENR – cold fusion as the solution to problems like global warming, transportation, energy, and NASA space missions planned yet unrealized.

NASA has a broad prerogative, their mission is to:

Protect the Earth

Develop a permanent extraterrestrial human presence

Enable commercial ventures to advance into space

The science of LENR will give us electricity without generators and controlled heat without a carbon signature. Overpopulation, global warming, and environmental damage are the greatest dangers to Earth. Converting to LENR power and human expansion into space is the solution.

The energetics of LENR will enable a new generation of launch vehicles and platforms that bring payload costs down from thousands per pound to dollars per pound. The compact size of LENR power, abundance of LENR fuels, and safe clean operation allows ease of use for space colonies.

The wide range and ease of availabity of LENR technology, 3D- Printing technology, advanced robotics, and the abundance of natural resources will allow private sector interests to thrive in space without a standard profit motive. Humanity as a space faring race will develop new economic models.

The NASA Office of Chief Scientist was discontinued in 2005 and reinstated in 2011.

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden has named Waleed Abdalati the agency’s chief scientist, effective Jan. 3, 2011. He is currently on leave from his position as director of the University of Colorado’s Earth Science and Observation Center, which carries out research and education activities on the use of remote sensing observations to understand the Earth.

His research has focused on the use of satellites and aircraft to understand how and why Earth’s ice cover is changing, and what those changes mean for life on our planet.

His appointment as Chief Scientist marks a return to NASA for Dr. Abdalati, where he worked from 1996-2008. From 2004-2008, he was head of the Cryospheric Sciences Branch at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., where he supervised a group of scientists who carried out research in the development and analysis of remote sensing observations to study the behavior of ice sheets, sea ice, and glaciers.

From 2000-2004, he managed NASA’s Cryospheric Sciences Program at NASA Headquarters, managing the agency’s interests and research investments in cryospheric research, and serving as program scientist on the ICESat and RADARSAT missions.

From 1996-2000, Dr. Abdalati was a researcher at Goddard in the Oceans and Ice Branch, where he analyzed satellite and aircraft measurements of glaciers and ice sheets to assess their contributions to sea level rise. He also served as deputy project scientist for NASA’s Ice Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat).

In the mid 1980s, before returning to graduate school, he worked as an engineer in the aerospace industry, designing, analyzing and testing components of various spacecraft and submarine systems.

Dr. Abdalati has received various awards and recognition, most notably the NASA Exceptional Service Medal and The Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers from the White House.

Office of the Chief Scientist

“The Chief Scientist, located in the Office of the Administrator, serves as the principal advisor to the NASA Administrator in science issues and as interface to the national and international science community, ensuring that NASA research programs are widely regarded as scientifically and technologically well founded and are appropriate for their intended applications.“

Goal 1: Provide oversight to assure that NASA funds only the most exemplary and meritorious science to enable NASA to achieve its mission.

Goal 2: Lead strategic planning for new and revolutionary research directions for NASA.

Goal 3: Maintain and foster communication links with the scientific and technical communities at large, including other Federal science agencies, academic, industrial, international partners, and the general public.

Goal 4: Act to encourage cooperation and synergy among the science programs and between science programs and other NASA programs.

Goal 5: Lead and manage the Generate Knowledge cross-cutting process.

Goal 6: Lead and manage the Communicate Knowledge cross-cutting process.

.

NASA Advisory Council Science Committee Meeting

Dr. Waleed Abdalati, recently appointed NASA Chief Scientist, addressed the Science Committee and described his background in Earth Science, research on glaciers and ice sheets, remote sensing, and managing the cryospheric sciences branch at GSFC.

Dr. Abdalati stressed that he accepted the position in the hopes of making a difference and being useful as an advisor to the Administrator. He noted that Mr. Bolden had also expressed an interest in employing a Chief Scientist to address the complex relationships among the agencies. The functions of the new office are meant to be free from the burdens of implementation in order to take a broad agency view, and to offer a different perspective across directorates and centers. The Chief Scientist will also identify where activities span directorates, and where these activities may be leveraged, and also “orphan science” such as life and microgravity sciences, which now resides within ESMD, to address the role of science in exploration.

The Chief Scientist will provide advocacy on behalf of science in general, through a philosophical approach. The office should be perceived as an additional avenue for communication, not an opportunity for an end-run. The main goals are to maximize science return for investment of resources; the objective is to put NASA science at the forefront. As the space program is transitioning, there is an opportunity to highlight this.

Authors note: Many managers cite rising costs of launch platforms as problematic. Read the full NASA Advisory Council Science Committee meeting notes for a deeper understanding.

In his fiscal year 2013 budget proposal, President Obama has requested $17.7 billion for NASA. The 2013 budget proposal submitted would cut funding for NASA’s planetary science projects by about $300 million.

Chief Scientist at NASA Langley

The Chief Scientist at NASA Langley is Dennis Bushnell; a bit of his bio, career, and recent history of actions is worth noting.

Bio: (nasa) Dennis M. Bushnell is the Chief Scientist at the NASA Langley Research Center where researchers are focusing on some of the biggest technical challenges of our time; global climate change, access to space and revolutions in airplanes and the air transportation system.

During his more than four decades at NASA, Dennis served the Gemini, Apollo, Viking and space shuttle programs. He invented and developed the riblet for speeding airflow across surfaces, an advance that led to turbulent drag reduction in aeronautics technology. He had six patents and has authored more than 250 publications and major presentations often on the future of technology and the impact it will have on our society.

He has received awards from professional groups, governmental agencies and academia, including the NASA Exceptional Scientific Achievement and Outstanding Leadership Medals and Distinguished Research Scientist Awards. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering, and a Fellow of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and the Royal Aeronautical Society.

Career: (link)Responsible for Technical Oversight and Advanced Program formulation for a major NASA Research Center with technical emphasis in the areas of Atmospheric Sciences and Structures, Materials, Acoustics, Flight Electronics/Control/Software, Instruments, Aerodynamics, Aerothermodynamics, Hypersonic Air breathing Propulsion, Computational Sciences and Systems Optimization for Aeronautics, Spacecraft, Exploration and Space Access.

Recent History of Actions

“All of these things indicate that by 2100, we could be looking at an average temperature increase 6 to 14 degrees Centigrade,” adds Bushnell, Langley’s chief scientist. “At those temperatures, beyond 2100 all of the ice will melt and the oceans beyond 2100 could come up 75 to 80 meters, enough to drown the homes of some 2 ½ billion people globally.”

“We would like to incite brainstorming on the part of the entire field,” Bushnell says. “I am soliciting, the (center) is soliciting any and all ideas, thoughts, comments about climate and energy. We want people to intuit, find, seek, identify, hunt an assembly of concepts of green energy generation, storage, conservation and transmission – the entire spectrum of approaches. We’re looking for ideas.”

“There’s some thinking on the field that the next administration may take climate and energy far more seriously,” Bushnell says. “And so we’re involved in an effort at a very low level to do a ‘what-if-the-boss-asks’ planning exercise.

“In other words, if the White House or the next administrator asks what could Langley do for energy, warming or whatever, it’s nice to have an answer.”

“So, it’s sometimes good to work ‘what-if-the-boss-asks’ before he asks it. This is called due diligence homework.”

Commercialization of Asteroids for Expansion into Space

“We talk about asteroids as a source of palladium and platinum and rare metals.” says Peter Diamondis of Planetary Resources Inc. “They’re also a source of … the things we value as humans… air water; that which keeps us alive. Asteroids are primarily a resource for our life as we expand into space.”

“Water sourced from asteroids will greatly enable the large-scale exploration of the solar system. Using the resources of space to expand into space is what will enable that bright future that we all dream of.” Eric Anderson, Co- founder.

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Gregory Goble is a Poet who focuses on the intersection of science, military, and aerospace applications. Contact Greg.

25 Comments

Brad Arnold
June 28, 2012 at 5:13 AM

“All of these things indicate that by 2100, we could be looking at an average temperature increase 6 to 14 degrees Centigrade,” adds Bushnell, Langley’s chief scientist.

Now I see why Bushnell is so far sighted – most people don’t understand how bad quickly it is going to happen (I could write a book on it, but suffice to say most people badly underestimate the rate and degree of warming this century). Lucky using geoengineering such warming can be mitigated very quickly and very cheaply (our sun-dimming pollution is already inadvertently cooling us by over 1 degree C).

BTW, who authored the bullet points at the top of the article (i.e. “The science of LENR will give us electricity without generators and controlled heat without a carbon signature. Overpopulation, global warming, and environmental damage are the greatest dangers to Earth. Converting to LENR power and human expansion into space is the solution.”)? They are also very far sighted.

it is funny to hear very serious and mainstream people seriously complain about mythic overpopulation while demographic stransition is starting always earlier than expected…
hearing them about possible climate sensitivity while recent resul reduce the uncertainety at much lower…
some complaining about low dose radioactivity effects, despite the evidence strong treshold effec, of no effect below 200mSv and ormesis just above, and the surprising rate of survival of people affect by radiation disease…
some complaining about GSM or Wifi effects…

What’s the source of this announcement? Can’t find it on NASA’s own website.
“Generating electricity without generators” : Do they know more than we know? Haven’t seen any indication of this elsewhere.

You will have alot of fun researching Blacklight Power (see ‘Real Popular Cold Fusion’ for links).
They have a nuclear reactive device emitting freed electrons from the lattice; independently tested and among the devices scrutinized by Dennis Bushnell (or so I conjecture). Bold statements by Bushnell.

Protect the Earth… see NASA Asteroid Earth Collision or Space Debris

Permanent Extraterrestial… see Space Station or Planned Space Station or Asteroid Mining

NASA Contract NNL08AA16B – NNL11AA00T – Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research – Phase II
N+4 Advanced Concept Development
i
Abstract
This final report documents the work of the Boeing Subsonic Ultra Green Aircraft Research
(SUGAR) team on Task 1 of the Phase II effort. The team consisted of Boeing Research and
Technology, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, General Electric, and Georgia Tech. Using a quantitative workshop process, the following technologies, appropriate to aircraft
operational in the N+4 2040 timeframe, were identified: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG),
Hydrogen, fuel cell hybrids, battery electric hybrids,

I assume that the Chief Scientist of NASA Waleed Abdalati is doing his job.
The Chief Scientist at Langley Dennis Bushnell is supported by Waleed. Such strong statements by Dennis would get him in alot of trouble with Waleed if erroneous. By the by, they know each other quite well having worked together for years… I assume Dennis cleared this with his boss Waleed before publishing.

Goal 1: Provide oversight to assure that NASA funds only the most exemplary and meritorious science to enable NASA to achieve its mission.

Yes, Waleed is certainly aware of Bushnell’s active support for LENR. It only means that he acknowledges Bushnell’s and legitimacy for doing “his own stuff”. Bushnell has his own “space of freedom”, so to speak. Bushnell is a chief scientist and has some power that comes with the title. He can’t be fired just because his boss doesn’t agree with him on one subject matter. Things are more complicated than that, and there are human factors as well.

Complicated… yes. Waleed provides the oversight to assure NASA funds only the most meritorious and exemplary science. I agree that Dennis “can’t be fired just because his boss doesn’t agree with him on one subject matter”; if the disagreement is over a trivial matter.

IF his strong statements about the “pathological science” of cold fusion are wrong, NASA will get alot of bad press, Waleed will have to deal with the fiasco and Dennis will get in alot of trouble.

Now that you mention it, it is not out of the question that Dennis could get fired over advocating “crackpot” science.

Dennis is not stupid and is aware if the controversy, I would think he is spot on sure of the truth behind each definative statement found in “LENR the Realism and Outlook”. IF not you can rest assured that for doing “his own stuff” he has used his own “space of freedom” to sully his carreer.

I assume Dennis cleared this with his boss Waleed before publishing. One step further… I assume Waleed peer reviewed and approved of it before NASA published the paper.

If Dennis is responsible for a cold fusion debacle the whole world would be hearing of it by now.

Dennis doesn’t do debacles. Waleed does not approve of debacles. This is not a debacle.

Rather LENR energetics provides “solutions to climate, energy and the limitations that restrict the NASA Mission areas, all of them.” Dennis would be a fool to say it if it ain’t true.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just saying you might “assume” too much. Not much people are aware of NASA ties with LENR. The general public isn’t (it has not been covered by mass media) and the scientific community isn’t really interested in the subject, a few exceptions apart.

Bushnell has also publicly advocated for ZPE extraction, which is total lunacy and a complete different question from LENR. I’m 100% sure NASA is NOT supporting ZPE pseudo-science, but that doesn’t prevent Bushnell from keeping his position.

The thing is you seem to think everyone’s aware of LENR controversy, and Bushnell’s work and so on, but there’s only a bunch of geeks who know about that, and their peers “tolerate” them as long as they don’t “steal” their budgets. The rest of the crowd, the people buying your book and reading e-cat blogs are mostly the same crowd than the UFO crackpots and the likes.

The gravity of the situation is…
As we are finally mastering and engineering low energy nuclear reactive environment devices we are realizing our need to understand gravity, dark matter, and zero point energy. Every scientific paper referenced in this NASA paper is worth reading for a layman’s understanding like mine.

Emerging Possibilities for Space Propulsion Breakthroughs

Originally published in the Interstellar Propulsion Society Newsletter, Vol. I, No. 1, July 1, 1995.

“Zero Point Energy”
Zero Point Energy (ZPE), or vacuum fluctuation energy are terms used to describe the random electromagnetic oscillations that are left in a vacuum after all other energy has been removed. If you remove all the energy from a space, take out all the matter, all the heat, all the light… everything — you will find that there is still some energy left. One way to explain this is from the uncertainty principle from quantum physics that implies that it is impossible to have an absolutely zero energy condition.
For light waves in space, the same condition holds. For every possible color of light, that includes the ones we can’t see, there is a non-zero amount of that light. Add up the energy for all those different frequencies of light and the amount of energy in a given space is enormous, even mind boggling, ranging from 10^36 to 10^70 Joules/m3.

In simplistic terms it has been said that there is enough energy in the volume the size of a coffee cup to boil away Earth’s oceans. – that’s one strong cup of coffee! For a while a lot of physics thought that concept was too hard to swallow. This vacuum energy is more widely accepted today.

What evidence shows that it exists?

First predicted in 1948, the vacuum energy has been linked to a number of experimental observations. Examples include the Casimir effect, Van der Waal forces, the Lamb-Retherford Shift, explanations of the Planck blackbody radiation spectrum, the stability of the ground state of the hydrogen atom from radiative collapse, and the effect of cavities to inhibit or enhance the spontaneous emission from excited atoms.

Doh, nobody says ZPE doesn’t exist. Of course it does!
But extracting energy from “it” is ***EXACTLY*** the same as trying to extract energy from a rubber band, you first have to put energy IN to get some OUT, with a less than 100% coefficient of performance. They speak of asymmetric configuration to trick the universe into infinite loop, this is pure non-sense, it’s the same wishfull thinking used by all those who “researched” perpetual motion machines since the dawn of science. Once you’ve seen one you’ve seen them all… The very fact that Bushnell buys this bullcrap shows what kind of a scientist he is. He’s certainly highly competent, but naive at the same time.

Oh and if you knew who is Harold Puthoff, you wouldn’t quote his work as some sort of proof of seriousness. This is the guy who pretended to have remote-viewing abilities, and who thought that Uri Geller was a “real magician” (real like in “with real magical powers”) in the 70’s.

It is not apparent nor productive for Abdalati to be second guessing Dr. Bushnell. It is, after all an “aeronautics and space” administration. Abdalati is climate guy with a degree in geography. NASA has learned the hard way their eccentric diversion into climate change lost them millions in funding and interest from the general public. In fact NASA is getting pushed out of the space business UNLESS they can spark the imagination of the Congress and public damned soon.

There is little going on at NASA today that captures the imagination of young people. Climate revolves around gloom and doom press announcements – and climate mass media coverage has plummeted by 80% since 2010. Bushnell and Zawodny’s acceptance of LENR is the best thing going for NASA. A revolutionary green energy source that demands a rewrite of classic physics laws means new horizons and exciting challenges for young minds. It is also the one technology that will dramatically change the lives of every human on planet. Far more than going to the moon.

As a purely PR move, and to return some of their lost funding – NASA would do well to mount a major campaign to engage the public in LENR. It solves energy, limits climate, is clean, and green, and abundant. It’s like a gift from science gods. Don’t look a gift like this in the mouth, NASA.

As a person who was active when NASA was chartered their Mandate included ” to inform and educate the Public”. Their secrecy and reticence must be examined and justified. When the german “paperclip boys” were running the shop there was a tendancy to forget this .

They had to be reminded when they pulled a national security blanket over their heads by enlisting the Air Force as a reason. No Longer the case so ask them anything. NSA and the other security agents are now separate.

Overview
The National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and a series of subsequent laws identify the transfer of Federally-owned or originated technology as a national priority and an important mission of each Federal Agency. Technology transfer promotes commercial activity, encourages economic growth, and stimulates innovation in business and commerce.

Legislation specifically requires that each Federal Agency have a formal technology transfer program. The legislation (such as the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980) gives NASA both the authority to transfer technology as well as protect the Government’s rights to its inventions. NASA generally seeks to protect those technologies having the greatest likelihood of being commercially applied. There are also cases where NASA does not apply protections, making technology available for free and unrestricted to anyone having an interest in its application.

The key principles of Open Government – participation, collaboration and transparency – have been embedded in NASA operations for more than 50 years. As NASA continues to implement the Open Government Directive, we have developed version 2.0 of our Open Government Plan to serve as a model – not a manual – for what a more open NASA might look like today. Our Plan collects the many new activities that exemplify the evolution of openness in NASA’s policy, technology and culture – and provides citizens the opportunity to respond and engage. http://open.nasa.gov/plan/

Hey Greg, Keep beating the drum. I did a little search on Boeing and LENR. I ended up at a NASA site where they made it perfectly clear exactly when where and how they expect to utilize the “NEW FIRE”.

What are the implications of a D+D->He4 level of energy resource from reasonably available raw materials (palladium or other platinum group metals and, of course the fuel…deuterium). Requiring little more infrastructure than a couple of hundred dollars worth of materials that could be possibly purchased from your local Home Depot.

Remember,… this is atomic Fusion !!! ( albeit cold) that was are dealing with here….